Sunday, August 14, 2011

Why are police so quick to absolve potential co-defendants of criminal responsibility?

I am not admitted to the Bar in Mississippi and I do not represent anything or anyone other than my own opinion and my opinions about general principles of criminal law, without having researched Mississippi law as it applies to this case.

However, in the Deryl Dedmon case, which I've discussed before, in terms of color-aroused violence, if a Black person or persons did what Dedmon and his friends did, then that Black person or persons would get the death penalty. There is absolutely no way that any participant present at the scene of the crime would be charged only with "assault."

However, I predict that Dedmon will not get the death penalty, much less his friends, because his skin is white and the skin of his victim is brown, and that is color-aroused injustice at work. It will depend, in large part, on the skin color of the jury, but even Black people have been taught to believe that a white life is more valuable than a Black one. Meanwhile, the Black prosecutor cannot be seen to be overly aggressive in this case, because he works in Mississippi. He might win the case in the national jury of public opinion while alienating his (all-white?) jury in Jackson, Mississippi.

I hear excuses being madeby a police detective for Dedmond's friend who traveled with him, but there is no way a police detective would offer these excuses if the killer were Black and the victim were white. I can't remember seeing a case in which a police detective in one jurisdiction made statements that tended to lessen the possible criminal consequences of a defendant in another jurisdiction. Detectives are all on the same team, unless the prosecutor is Black and the perpetrators are white.

Moreover, even if Dedmond's friend wasn't present for the run-over, he can and should be charged with conspiracy to commit murder (there was an agreement when they began their trip and murder was a foreseeable result) and attempted murder (Dedmon's friend beat the victim) as well as murder (Dedmon's friend actively engaged in a concerted effort which ended in the foreseeable death of the victim.

The friend is known to have inflicted injuries that might have killed the victim even if the victim had not been run over. That's attempted murder, and the collusion with the murderer to effectuate the beating makes it murder outright. I think we can all agree that it wasn't necessary for Dedmon to run over the victim with a pick-up truck in order for the victim to die, as the result of a beating that both Dedmon and his friend engaged in.

A conspiracy is committed at the time of the agreement to commit a crime. Since the agreement is the crime, it doesn't matter whether someone who agreed and took steps in furtherance of the conspiracy later changed his mind, e.g. because he had to go to the bathroom, and was therefore not present when the conspiracy ended in the goal that was intended. All conspirators are guilty of conspiracy, even if some of them are in Australia when the conspiratorial goal, or the likely result of the goal, is "achieved."

It was likely that two or more people young adults beating one middle-aged man, over and over again, would result in murder, and people are legally responsible for the foreseeable results of their behavior.

A lot of white people took part in the conspiracy, agreeing on the demographic group of the victim and where the victim could be found, and that the crime should be committed right away. ALL of those people are chargeable with conspiracy because the all collaborated and colluded in the agreement to do an act which none of them might have done without the encouragement of the others. The fact that the police haven't released the names of these other individuals and that their criminal responsibility has been ruled out is yet another example of color-aroused injustice.

If the victim had been white and the conspirators Black, all of them would have been charged with murder and then one of them might get life imprisonment instead of the death penalty in exchange for testimony against Dedmon and the friends who were with him.

This case helps explain why Haley Barbour decided not to run for president. He had too many skeletons already and there was always the risk that something like this would happen when he was the nominated candidate and would be besmirched nationally, even if this murder was celebrated by whites in Mississippi.

Friday, August 12, 2011

Mass Incarceration:Naïve Juveniles go into Court looking for Justice and Mercy, while Judge looks for Kickbacks for sending them to prison.
Former Luzerne County Juvenile Court Judge Mark A. Ciavarella Jr. was sentence to 28 years in prison for his part in the “Kids For Cash” kickback scandal. A second juvenile judge, Michael Conahan, pleaded guilty last year and awaits sentencing. The two were accused of taking more than $2.8 million in bribes from the builder of the PA Child Care and Western PA Child Care detention centers and extorting hundreds of thousands of dollars from the facilities' co-owner.

“The defendant argues he didn’t sell juveniles retail. We agree with that. He was selling them wholesale,” said Assistant U.S. Attorney Gordon Zubrod, maintaining that the jury found Ciavarella guilty of a racketeering conspiracy for being part of a scheme to extract cash from the construction and operation of the two for-profit centers.

As a result of the corruption case, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court tossed about 4,000 convictions issued by Ciavarella between 2003 and 2008, saying he violated the constitutional rights of the juveniles, including the right to legal counsel and the right to intelligently enter a plea.

Fellow former Judges Conahan and Michael T. Toole both pleaded guilty to criminal charges last year as investigators untangled a web of corruption. A number of other public officials were caught in the probe as well, including the county's court administrator, the clerk of courts and a member of the juvenile probation services office.

Some people may see this case as an aberration and isolated, one-of-a-kind, corruption case that could only happen in Pennsylvania. What people overlook is who is the real beneficiary in the scheme, the ones receiving the bribes and kickbacks, or the one paying them?

The Prison Industrial Complex feeds on incarceration. The more prison beds occupied the more profits for the corporations that build and manage facilities.

Where paying bribes and kickbacks to juvenile justice officials may not be the normal way of doing business, they are instrumental in “get tough” policies, “zero tolerance” and longer prison sentence advocacy.

The irony in the above case is that it began with an investigation into mobster activities. There is an ominous sense of danger for those involved. Once graft is accepted from mobsters, the next bribe cannot be rejected. And so, the corrupt scheme builds upon itself, until there is a steady stream of juveniles going into prison, for little or no offense, as some investigations revealed.

Child Rights advocates cannot stop the pipeline other than warn juveniles to stay out of the juvenile justice system. Any other intervention, such as revealing the truth behind the corruption, can lead to terminal consequences.

Tuesday, August 9, 2011

The Great Britain website The Guardian reports that the, Mark Duggan, a "29-year-old father-of-four was shot by police during an attempted arrest in Tottenham, north London, on Thursday," but there is suspicion that the police had decided to execute Duggan before the stopped him, or made that decision at the scene. The Guardian also ran a story today whose title and subtitle say:

The IPCC was established by the Police Reform Act and became operational in April 2004. Its primary statutory purpose is to increase public confidence in the police complaints system in England and Wales.

The IPCC also investigates the most serious complaints and allegations of misconduct against the police in England and Wales, as well as handling appeals from people who are not satisfied with the way police have dealt with their complaint.

Just as some of the rioters must have believed during the riots before the IPCC report was released today, Mr. Duggan may not have been shot in the chest by police for any justifiable reason.

Speculation that Mr Duggan was "assassinated" in an execution style involving a number of shots to the head was "categorically untrue", the commission added.

Mr Duggan's brother Shaun Hall told Sky News that the family was "devastated" by his death and dismissed as "utter rubbish" claims he had shot at police.

Certainly, the suspicion that Mark Duggan was assassinated by police might be fueling riots, just as shooting such as this one triggered riots in the United States in the 1960's and early 1970's. One white female British blogger, whose blog is called "Penny Red," describes the riots that seem to have taken over Great Britain in recent days:

I’m huddled in the front room with some shell-shocked friends, watching my city burn. The BBC is interchanging footage of blazing cars and running street battles in Hackney, of police horses lining up in Lewisham, of roiling infernos that were once shops and houses in Croydon and in Peckham. Last night, Enfield, Walthamstow, Brixton and Wood Green were looted; there have been hundreds of arrests and dozens of serious injuries, and it will be a miracle if nobody dies tonight. This is the third consecutive night of rioting in London, and the disorder has now spread to Leeds, Liverpool, Bristol and Birmingham. Politicians and police officers who only hours ago were making stony-faced statements about criminality are now simply begging the young people of Britain’s inner cities to go home. Britain is a tinderbox, and on Friday, somebody lit a match. How the hell did this happen? And what are we going to do now?

The Guardian provides additional details showing that the police vigilance and killing of Mark Duggan was not an ordinary traffic stop, but a well-planned confrontation:

A father of three died instantly after an apparent exchange of fire when police attempted to arrest him in north London, it emerged on Friday.

A police marksman escaped with his life when a bullet lodged in his radio during the confrontation that ended in the death of Mark Duggan, 29. The Scotland Yard firearms officer was taken to hospital and later released.

IPCC investigators believe two shots were fired by an armed officer. A spokesman for the IPCC said that at around 6.15pm on Thursday officers from Operation Trident, the Metropolitan police unit that deals with gun crime in London's black communities, with officers from the Specialist Firearms Command (CO19), stopped a minicab to carry out a pre-planned arrest. (Emphasis added.)

How did a pre-planned arrest of a man believed to be armed nonetheless result in a "shoot-out"? The perception, and the belief among rioters that police should not execute members of the public, might be the simple explanation of why Blacks and others are rioting in Great Britain. Now that an official agency reports that the victim didn't fire at police, the riots could continue and even spread.

As I write, the looting and arson attacks have spread to at least fifty different areas across the UK, including dozens in London, and communities are now turning on each other, with the Guardian reporting on rival gangs forming battle lines. It has become clear to the disenfranchised young people of Britain, who feel that they have no stake in society and nothing to lose, that they can do what they like tonight, and the police are utterly unable to stop them. That is what riots are all about.

The case of Deryl Dedmond, a white teenager who seems to have suffered from Extreme Color-Aroused Disorder (ECAD) that led him to murder a Black stranger, seems to be getting massive attention in the United States, as it should. Apparently, Deryl Dedmond led a group of white teenagers to get in their cars and trucks, drive from their all-white suburb to Jackson, Misssissippi, pick a Black man at random, beat him to within an inch of his life, and then run the Black man over with a pick-up truck. "According to CNN, the teens were specifically hunting for a black victim."

Curiously, police have decided to charge only two of several white youths in this case, including murder for Dedmond and assault for his companion. Compare this to the Jena Six case, where no one was seriously hurt and yet three Black men were charged with acts including attempted murder. This case will be an object lesson about the criminal (in)justice system, regarding the way that Blacks and whites are investigated charged and sentenced in similar cases, based on their skin color.

It also seems obvious to me (see the above video) that Deryl Dedmond was led to the act he committed by a serious mental illness called "Extreme Color-Aroused Disorder" (ECAD) because:

Witnesses say that Dedmond showed aggressive and antagonistic behavior toward Blacks over a period of years.

Dedmond came to the attention of people in his community as a result of his color-aroused ideation, emotion and behavior;

Witnesses believed it was only a matter of time before Dedmond committed a serious color aroused crime, which is a hallmark of Extreme Color Aroused Disorder. Anyone who will kill a stranger based on his skin color has a serious mental illness called Extreme Color Aroused Disorder. Color Aroused Disorder is "extreme" when the color arousal leads one person to murder another, because murder itself is extreme and often leads to long jail sentences that separate the mentally ill person from his family, friends and educational or professional career. An illness that seriously harms a person in that many important areas of his life is "extreme" per se.

Now that we have seen what Deryl could do based on his awareness, ideation, emotion and behavior concerning his own skin color and that of another skin-color group, let's see how the criminal justice system and the media treat this case.

Hopefully, Deryl Dedmond is already getting some psychiatric attention that might eventually lead from an extreme condition that causes him to commit murder and lessen the illness until he can at least not kill based on his ideation and emotion. He may need medication that enables him to control strong emotions more successfully and also to help him reduce his rage to the point where he can engage meaningfully in therapy that addresses is apparent Extreme Color-Aroused Disorder (ECAD).

What made this youth engage in extreme color-aroused ideation, emotion, and behavior? Maybe he has Extreme Color-Aroused Disorder (ECAD).

How can you tell whether an alleged act or acts reflect and are symptomatic of Extreme Color-Aroused Ideation, Emotion and Behavior Disorder (ECAD)? In criminal cases, among other evidence, people's statements (verbally expressed ideation) may reflect their hate, fear, envy, jealousy, or even curiosity, love, lust, empathy and caring, based on skin color.

When ideation and emotion are based on skin color, and skin color is the cue for a person to commit a criminal act, then you have a color-aroused behavior that, in many cases, may bring civil and criminal penalties. It is important to note that it is the illicit behavior that may bring civil and criminal punishments, while these punishments would NOT result from "mere" extreme color-aroused ideation and emotion, without the illicit behavior. The illicit behavior is a key symptom sometimes present in Extreme Color-Aroused Disorder (ECAD). For example,

CNN is reporting the alleged hate crime [against] James Craig Anderson, a 49-year-old auto plant worker, who was beaten and then murdered [run over by a truck driven] by a group of white teens intent on hurting a black person. Deryl Dedmon, Jr., 18, of Brandon, Mississippi and his friends were at a party drinking when Dedmon allegedly told friends they should leave, saying "let's go fuck with some niggers," according to law enforcement officials.

Is all color-aroused violence a "hate crime"? As a legal matter it might be, but as a matter of psychology, not necessarily. If the white-skinned Dedmon killed the victim because the white anti-black antagonist was jealous of Black people and their Black President, then the crime might factually be a crime of envy, hate, jealousy and vengeance. If you if you imagine Dedmon in his first meeting with the prison psychologist, his resentments against Black people may be based on a number of emotions, since virtually no one feels only hate, consciously and unconsciously. Everybody has a panoply of feelings. A white man might hate a Black US Senate candidate because he fears the Black candidate will be elected.

I am painfully aware that a lot of Black people and white people believe that any attempt to undertand psychologically why a culprit did what he did risks that the culprit may be perceived as not as culpable for what he did, and therefore might receive a lesser sentence, if he receives a sentence at all.

In this case, where there is video cam evidence and where Dedmon admitted his crime after the fact, Dedmon could receive a strong prison sentence, unless his case is tried before an all-white jury. Perhaps the case may be tried before an all-white jury, and then Dedmon might go free, in spite of his crime that was based on anti-Black antagonistic ideation, emotion and criminal behavior.

When a person assaults and kills a stranger based on the skin color of the victim and the skin color of the accused, then that is a strong indicator that the culprit has Extreme Color-Aroused Disorder, since no one without the disorder would risk imprisonment for the purpose of targeting a stranger based on skin color. Only a person with Extreme Color Aroused Disorder would do that. Disorder is "extreme" when, among other facts:

The behavior violated laws such that it could bring or be likely to lead to criminal charges or civil liability against the assailant(s);

The assailants did not know the victim and were looking to harm someone, anyone, based on his brown skin color;

The assailant risks that the man they attack might be armed or have friends nearby, and so attacking the victim could very well lead to physical harm for the assailants;

The assailants did not stand to gain or save any money through this behavior, but could only lose money so the assailants' behavior was not self-interested but was likely to be self-destructive;

The assailants run the risk of spending time in jail or even being executed for their crime;

The assailants lose social, political and potential professional opportunities as a result of the behavior.

The above focuses on the irrational and self-destructive nature of the behavior, which is indicative of Extreme Color-Aroused Disorder (ECAD). Of course, behavior can be self-interested (i.e. stealing from someone based on their skin color) and still be symptomatic of Extreme Color Aroused Disorder.

When the accused Mr. Dedmon has gets to prison and speaks with the prison psychologist for the first time, Dedmon might well reveal that he was envious of Black people, many of whom have successful jobs, nice cars and a happy future ahead of them.

Is it wrong (or so hard) to acknowledge that a crime might have been motivated by color-aroused envy or color-aroused jealousy and/or color-aroused fear, as well as color-aroused hatred?

If a Black man kills a white man because he fears that the white man will take his wife, based on his knowledge that his wife has a thing for white men, then the killing of a white man by a Black man could be aroused by jealousy, envy and fear that leads to antagonistic behavior. If this seems complex, it is. Human beings are believed to have powers of feeling, thought and behavior that others in the animal kingdom do not have. If you accept that proposition, then you must also accept that human minds are copiously full of all sorts ideation and emotion that sometimes lead to behavior.

If you hear anyone trying to describe all of this with one word, e.g. "racism" or "hate," then you know that person simply has not take the time and effort to understand the mechanics of color-aroused ideation, emotion and behavior, and they may even be aversive to complex thought about inherently complex people.

Monday, August 8, 2011

Rippa, from the AfroSpear's "Intersection of Madness and Reality blog, reports:

For the past few years I’ve watched and read with disgust as my man Villager over at Electronic Village highlights story after story of taser deaths in America. As you could imagine, these are deaths at the hands of police officers; anbd yes, oftentimes the victims are people of color – more specifically, they’re mostly Black males. But then I came across the following story, and I have to wonder: how long must legalized torture that’s not seen as deadly force continue to be sanctioned?

CINCINNATI – An autopsy is expected to be performed Monday on a teen who died after being stunned with a Taser gun at the University of Cincinnati.

Everette Howard, 18, died early Saturday morning. Friends said Howard was trying to break up a fight in front of Turner Hall when campus police responded.

Police said Howard appeared angry and didn’t follow orders. Witnesses said Howard collapsed after a UC officer stunned him with a Taser.

Read more at Rippa's blog on Everett Howard's death at the hands of a police officer with an electrocution device. The police electrocuted and executed Everett Howard, without so much as a trial. This was an extra-judicial murder. We used to call it "lynching," but the rope and the tree have since been replaced by an electronic fire arm, just like the "phasers" in the Star Trek television series. However the people with the phasers now are all too often police with suspected Extreme Color-Aroused Disorder. They view all young Black men as worthless pre-prison and/or pre-death scum, even when these young Black men have rejected prison and death, and are pursuing college degrees.

Blacks in the United States need a national anti-electrocution and execution law just as much as we needed anti-lynching laws in the days of Jim Crow.